Guns don't kill people, people do. Karate does not kill people, people do. Karate is designed to give people a chance and put them in a good position to be successful, whatever your idea of success in a fight is. Guns are generally considered deadly. However not everyone who is shot dies. Not everyone who is shot center mass dies. Does that mean guns are not deadly? A gun's deadliness increases with the skill of the shooter. Someone with a high level of skill with a gun is very deadly with a gun, and is also the safest person with a gun not only for others, but for themselves. An unskilled person with a gun is dangerous for them and for you. The same is true of karate. Karate is used to develop attributes needed in a phsycial altercation. Once those attributes are obtained the karateka drills them so he/she can respond in specific ways to physical violence. Given the karateka is able he can respond to physical violence better than he/she would with no training. The success of the responce is completely up to the ability of the karateka. Really, this stuff is really simple, if you strike a person hard enough, multiple times, in the right spot/s THEY WILL DIE. Now, do you have the ability to do such is the question. Does anyone question whether this is true or not? Just like with a gun, hypothetically if I shoot a person in specific spots they will die. However, the only way to test this is to shoot and kill someone. Keep training, fight hard, and let God sort'em out.

and you make your point using a hypothetical conversation manufactured to demonstrate your own point?

You use the word religion like it's a bad thing. whats wrong with having faith in something? do you have faith in your 5 senses? do you have faith in pain or pleasure? I have faith in being shown a movement, then feeling the pain of it applied...it doesn't take much leap of faith to realize: "hey, that was only half speed ...if it was done full power, I'd be out. -that might be a good one to have down cold in case I'm ever attacked."

I suspect you've only ever trained with the one-step kumite-like training interpretations of kata...the stuff that wasn't meant for application - they are training drills. Useful in their own right for their own reasons. But the instructors you might have been exposed to told you "these are the effective real-life self-defense movements." ...so at first you believe it, then after years it dawns on you that they are useless for that claim. You get frustrated and come up with your own. Failing that, you question the very idea of kata itself with philosophical suppositions. ...in varying degree, many have probably gone thru kata-identity crisis.

There are non-commercial things out there that are being taught for free, not on DVD, not in books, not at a shaolin temple 6-month tour, not at an Okinawa visit during shore-leave. stuff thats not necessarily private or secret either, just stuff that is subtle. people miss it because they want the right now, gimme gimme gimme.

How many people do you know that would stick with something knowing full well in advance that it may take 5 or 10 years in order to notice improvement? not many. talk about faith. but you know something? Those are the only ones who can really tap dry what a kata has to offer. stand in front and train with a person of this calibre sometime, nothing hypothetical about it.

I'm not suggesting I'm anywhere near there...but I've seen enough thru the years to know it IS there.

maybe you are specifically choosing to not look for self-defense techniques in kata because you believe you can come up with a new-age use for kata and hence, a product. Is that fair to say or am I out of line?

You can say that a ridge hand from hell would only hypothetically break somebody's neck, or that a good wrist lock would only hypothetically break somebody's wrist or that sticking your thumbs into somebody's eyes would only hypothetically hurt them or that a punch with a thousand p.s.i. would only hypothetically break a rib or rupture a bladder or that pushing somebody's chin down and trying to turn their head around 360 degrees would only hypothetically break their neck.........

but the fact of the matter is, if the moves are realistic and you're not holding a crystal ball trying to steal somebody's "chi" or "ki" it's usually pretty easy to tell if a move would work or not. if you doubt a move or don't see how it could work, then find out. just make sure that the person showing you is profficient enough not to either kill, or injure you, or show u a bunch of BS that will get u killed.

Indeed, i have faith in all my techniques, they dont always work... thats not the techniques fault. I suffered kata identity crisis, lol... im just glad I started questioning the techniques very early in my training.

As far as deadliness goes, isnt that all apart of the mental attitude ?? Seriously though, the concept of your whole energy -- mind, body, spirit -- going into a technique , isnt that what makes it the deadly technique, as opposed to someone just doing a complicated hand waving gesture ?

Im sure if I were to grab on to someones head with the intent of snapping the neck (one hand on top of head, other on jaw) and perform the standard "karate punch" ... it would most definately break that persons neck... (if it doesnt, then my defense will just continue) If you doubt your technique effectiveness, you will hesitate and die... life is no joke, knives, guns, gangs, blab blah, actually exist ... the world really is filled with evil...

Whoever said if you doubt bunkai, play around with someone who is a master at bunkai application in free sparring, I agree totally... it will open your mind so far, you wont need to worry about emptying your cup because you wont ever fill it after that.

I believe that there are 6 types of techniques in karate to try to control the adversary.Dislocations, hurting or rupture of muscles and tendons, sealing the breath, attacking veins and artories, attacking chi points, throws.The point of karate was in my opinion not about deadliness but about overcoming and controlling your adversary. I ken no kon means train the fist to penetrate the spirit.However certain techniques on certain area's can result into death. Much howevere also depends on the mental and physical state of your adversary.I do believe howevere more in the principle of I ken no kon.

There is nothing wrong with having faith in something, although I do think that this could be made more transparent to beginners. I’m sure that many techniques from kata are quite capable of causing someone serious injury and in some cases death. However, if you are facing an “unwilling” opponent then this becomes exponentially more difficult to achieve. As you’ve said, one step kumite interpretations of kata are not useful in this respect but that is not the reason I don’t think kata contain deadly techniques. The reason I don’t think that kata contain deadly techniques is that this is a hypothesis that can’t be tested. Why should I commit myself to something that can’t be properly tested? What’s more if I were to make a kata that did contain obvious methods of maiming or killing (attacking obvious weak spots like eyes, neck, wrist, fingers, groin) I guarantee it would not be stylistically similar to karate kata. If you think about it, there might be a reason that “many have probably gone thru kata-identity crisis.” and this reason might also explain why it takes so long to make kata “work” in such a way that the discussed hypothesis starts to seem non-hypothetical. I do not choose not to look for self defence or deadly techniques in kata, I choose to look for what is there. The fact I have come up with a “product” based on what I have found does not detract from my goal of objectively studying kata. Hence the reason I did not come onto this site proclaiming that double hand grappling was the solution to everything.

Quote: What’s more if I were to make a kata that did contain obvious methods of maiming or killing (attacking obvious weak spots like eyes, neck, wrist, fingers, groin) I guarantee it would not be stylistically similar to karate kata.

I find this very strange. When I look at kata and train it and investigate it or see people investigate or demonstrate classical kata (handed down to us from the 19th and early 20th century), I see nothing but "methods of maiming or killing (attacking obvious weak spots like eyes, neck, wrist, fingers, groin)".I see this not only in style I study (goju-ryu) but also in other styles (Okinawan or Japanese).Because a movement is standardized does not mean that the application is standardized. Chojun Miyagi said on the matter of bunkai 'think, you will figure it out yourselve'. The reason why there are so many versions of bassai or sesan is because people think. There is not one answer to a technique in a kata. This is the genuis of karate. For me that's why it is an art.

Geez...really? Common sense can be tested...apparently. How much brain stew do you have to eat to 'figure out' what would probably happen if......? How about what the people who made the kata? Were they just messing with the future generations when they passed it on?

What type of kool-aid do you drink man?

_________________________
The2nd ammendment, it makes all the others possible. <///<